- 
                Notifications
    
You must be signed in to change notification settings  - Fork 13.9k
 
Tweak handling of "struct like start" where a struct isn't supported #147004
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
          
     Merged
      
      
    Conversation
  
    
      This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
      Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
    
  
  
    
    This improves the case where someone tries to write a `match` expr where the patterns have type ascription syntax. Makes them less verbose, by giving up on the first encounter in the block, and makes them more accurate by only treating them as a struct literal if successfuly parsed as such.
| 
           r? @fee1-dead rustbot has assigned @fee1-dead. Use   | 
    
      
        
              This comment has been minimized.
        
        
      
    
  This comment has been minimized.
c949040    to
    8ee0618      
    Compare
  
    
      
        
              This comment has been minimized.
        
        
      
    
  This comment has been minimized.
8ee0618    to
    bb48c16      
    Compare
  
    | 
           Thanks. @bors r+ rollup  | 
    
    
  Zalathar 
      added a commit
        to Zalathar/rust
      that referenced
      this pull request
    
      Oct 2, 2025 
    
    
      
  
    
      
    
  
…-dead
Tweak handling of "struct like start" where a struct isn't supported
This improves the case where someone tries to write a `match` expr where the patterns have type ascription syntax. Makes them less verbose, by giving up on the first encounter in the block, and makes them more accurate by only treating them as a struct literal if successfully parsed as such.
Before, encountering something like `match a { b:` would confuse the parser and think everything after `match` *must* be a struct, and if it wasn't it would generate a cascade of unnecessary diagnostics.
    
    
  bors 
      added a commit
      that referenced
      this pull request
    
      Oct 2, 2025 
    
    
      
  
    
      
    
  
Rollup of 10 pull requests Successful merges: - #146281 (Support `#[rustc_align_static]` inside `thread_local!`) - #146535 (mbe: Implement `unsafe` attribute rules) - #146585 (indexing: reword help) - #147004 (Tweak handling of "struct like start" where a struct isn't supported) - #147221 (Forbid `//@ compile-flags: -Cincremental=` in tests) - #147225 (Don't enable shared memory by default with Wasm atomics) - #147227 (implement `Box::take`) - #147231 (Extending `#[rustc_force_inline]` to be applicable to inherent methods) - #147233 (Initialize llvm submodule if not already the case to run citool) - #147236 (Update books) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
    
  matthiaskrgr 
      added a commit
        to matthiaskrgr/rust
      that referenced
      this pull request
    
      Oct 2, 2025 
    
    
      
  
    
      
    
  
…-dead
Tweak handling of "struct like start" where a struct isn't supported
This improves the case where someone tries to write a `match` expr where the patterns have type ascription syntax. Makes them less verbose, by giving up on the first encounter in the block, and makes them more accurate by only treating them as a struct literal if successfully parsed as such.
Before, encountering something like `match a { b:` would confuse the parser and think everything after `match` *must* be a struct, and if it wasn't it would generate a cascade of unnecessary diagnostics.
    
    
  jhpratt 
      added a commit
        to jhpratt/rust
      that referenced
      this pull request
    
      Oct 2, 2025 
    
    
      
  
    
      
    
  
…-dead
Tweak handling of "struct like start" where a struct isn't supported
This improves the case where someone tries to write a `match` expr where the patterns have type ascription syntax. Makes them less verbose, by giving up on the first encounter in the block, and makes them more accurate by only treating them as a struct literal if successfully parsed as such.
Before, encountering something like `match a { b:` would confuse the parser and think everything after `match` *must* be a struct, and if it wasn't it would generate a cascade of unnecessary diagnostics.
    
    
  bors 
      added a commit
      that referenced
      this pull request
    
      Oct 2, 2025 
    
    
      
  
    
      
    
  
Rollup of 9 pull requests Successful merges: - #146281 (Support `#[rustc_align_static]` inside `thread_local!`) - #146535 (mbe: Implement `unsafe` attribute rules) - #146585 (indexing: reword help) - #147004 (Tweak handling of "struct like start" where a struct isn't supported) - #147221 (Forbid `//@ compile-flags: -Cincremental=` in tests) - #147225 (Don't enable shared memory by default with Wasm atomics) - #147227 (implement `Box::take`) - #147233 (Initialize llvm submodule if not already the case to run citool) - #147236 (Update books) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
    
  rust-timer 
      added a commit
      that referenced
      this pull request
    
      Oct 2, 2025 
    
    
      
  
    
      
    
  
Rollup merge of #147004 - estebank:ascription-in-pat, r=fee1-dead Tweak handling of "struct like start" where a struct isn't supported This improves the case where someone tries to write a `match` expr where the patterns have type ascription syntax. Makes them less verbose, by giving up on the first encounter in the block, and makes them more accurate by only treating them as a struct literal if successfully parsed as such. Before, encountering something like `match a { b:` would confuse the parser and think everything after `match` *must* be a struct, and if it wasn't it would generate a cascade of unnecessary diagnostics.
    
  github-actions bot
      pushed a commit
        to rust-lang/miri
      that referenced
      this pull request
    
      Oct 3, 2025 
    
    
      
  
    
      
    
  
Rollup of 9 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang/rust#146281 (Support `#[rustc_align_static]` inside `thread_local!`) - rust-lang/rust#146535 (mbe: Implement `unsafe` attribute rules) - rust-lang/rust#146585 (indexing: reword help) - rust-lang/rust#147004 (Tweak handling of "struct like start" where a struct isn't supported) - rust-lang/rust#147221 (Forbid `//@ compile-flags: -Cincremental=` in tests) - rust-lang/rust#147225 (Don't enable shared memory by default with Wasm atomics) - rust-lang/rust#147227 (implement `Box::take`) - rust-lang/rust#147233 (Initialize llvm submodule if not already the case to run citool) - rust-lang/rust#147236 (Update books) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
    
  rust-cloud-vms bot
      pushed a commit
        to makai410/rustc_public
      that referenced
      this pull request
    
      Oct 12, 2025 
    
    
      
  
    
      
    
  
Rollup of 9 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang/rust#146281 (Support `#[rustc_align_static]` inside `thread_local!`) - rust-lang/rust#146535 (mbe: Implement `unsafe` attribute rules) - rust-lang/rust#146585 (indexing: reword help) - rust-lang/rust#147004 (Tweak handling of "struct like start" where a struct isn't supported) - rust-lang/rust#147221 (Forbid `//@ compile-flags: -Cincremental=` in tests) - rust-lang/rust#147225 (Don't enable shared memory by default with Wasm atomics) - rust-lang/rust#147227 (implement `Box::take`) - rust-lang/rust#147233 (Initialize llvm submodule if not already the case to run citool) - rust-lang/rust#147236 (Update books) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
    
  flip1995 
      pushed a commit
        to flip1995/rust-clippy
      that referenced
      this pull request
    
      Oct 18, 2025 
    
    
      
  
    
      
    
  
Rollup of 9 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang/rust#146281 (Support `#[rustc_align_static]` inside `thread_local!`) - rust-lang/rust#146535 (mbe: Implement `unsafe` attribute rules) - rust-lang/rust#146585 (indexing: reword help) - rust-lang/rust#147004 (Tweak handling of "struct like start" where a struct isn't supported) - rust-lang/rust#147221 (Forbid `//@ compile-flags: -Cincremental=` in tests) - rust-lang/rust#147225 (Don't enable shared memory by default with Wasm atomics) - rust-lang/rust#147227 (implement `Box::take`) - rust-lang/rust#147233 (Initialize llvm submodule if not already the case to run citool) - rust-lang/rust#147236 (Update books) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
  
    Sign up for free
    to join this conversation on GitHub.
    Already have an account?
    Sign in to comment
  
      Labels
      
    S-waiting-on-bors
  Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. 
  
    T-compiler
  Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. 
  Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
  This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
  Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
  Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
  Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
  Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
  Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
  You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
  Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
  This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
  Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
  Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
  Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
  Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
  
    
  
    
This improves the case where someone tries to write a
matchexpr where the patterns have type ascription syntax. Makes them less verbose, by giving up on the first encounter in the block, and makes them more accurate by only treating them as a struct literal if successfully parsed as such.Before, encountering something like
match a { b:would confuse the parser and think everything aftermatchmust be a struct, and if it wasn't it would generate a cascade of unnecessary diagnostics.